Main menu

You are here

SPAM

Pages

written Sunday, April 20 2008 05:56Profile#25
Well, I don't think one person is supposed to finish the can all by himself. The can doesn't lend itself very well to being resealed though. Probably the best thing to do would have been to fry/prepare the rest of it and save it in the fridge.

Are cows so helpless? Given that most of their natural predators have been eliminated, I would imagine unfenced cows would do okay for themselves. Wasn't it the case that years before settlers in Australia made it over/through the Blue Mountains, some of their stray livestock had made it through?Posts: 2242 |
Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00

Well, I don't think one person is supposed to finish the can all by himself. The can doesn't lend itself very well to being resealed though. Probably the best thing to do would have been to fry/prepare the rest of it and save it in the fridge.

Are cows so helpless? Given that most of their natural predators have been eliminated, I would imagine unfenced cows would do okay for themselves. Wasn't it the case that years before settlers in Australia made it over/through the Blue Mountains, some of their stray livestock had made it through?

Then why does my grandfather put donkeys i n his pasture to keep coyotes away?

Deep ecology is a wacky field: essentially, complex self-organising ecosystems are seen as having inherent value, and sometimes regarded as living organisms in their own right. I don't really buy into that stuff myself, but it's not hard to critique the ethics of farming livestock from a utilitarian position (see Peter Singer).

I can appreciate the contention that the bovine species may be a morally relevant entity, with its own rights and all that. What puzzles me is the way this perspective seems to arise spontaneously and implicitly. I think maybe it's because few humans, even few vegetarians, really do or even can think about cows as individuals.

When the fight over a human being's rights gets dirty, people start talking about how he was always a good boy to his doting mother, or hint that she was mean to the servants. We get into character, personal circumstances, relationships. Nobody does this with cows. (It could be that as humans we just don't appreciate these things or their analogues in other species, but I suspect that cows are just too dumb to have those things or anything like them.)

But why does it seem so natural to seize on synecdoche as the substitute for that sort of discussion? Is moving from individual cows to The Cow in some way similar, as a rhetorical move, to highlighting the individual identity of a human being?

--------------------Listen carefully because some of your options may have changed.Posts: 3335 |
Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00

Then why does my grandfather put donkeys i n his pasture to keep coyotes away?

If anything that only proves his point. Donkeys being strong enough to be on their on.

Besides, near every animal has a predator. Just because an animal can be hunted down and killed doesn't mean it can't survive on its own. Quite the contrary, actually.

He put the donkeys in there to protect the cows and according to Wikipedia donkeys can't reproduce. People who keep cows and other livestock grow the great pains to protect them from preadtors, illness, and walking out in the middle of the road and getting hit by a car ect.

written Sunday, April 20 2008 12:55ProfileHomepage#30
Lots of it as brown bag school lunch meat growing up. Actually tastes pretty good sliced as thin as possible and fried till browned and fat poured off.

Bad for your health. Not heart friendly. Still tasty fried on a bun or bread with lettuce, tomato and sauce like BBQ sauce. But then so is bacon and it's far better tasting.

I have not bought any in last 3 decades or so. Will eat if served as a guest as long as it's fried, fried, fried. Heavily nuked in microwave.

--------------------The point of fighting is to win. If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!Posts: 181 |
Registered: Monday, June 12 2006 07:00

He put the donkeys in there to protect the cows and according to Wikipedia donkeys can't reproduce. People who keep cows and other livestock grow the great pains to protect them from preadtors, illness, and walking out in the middle of the road and getting hit by a car ect.

Duh. He's being a good Capitalist and protecting his investment.

Do you believe everything you read on the Internet? Especially Wiki, which can be edited by absolutely anyone? Besides, donkeys are fertile, Wiki even says so, proving you very much wrong. You've got donkeys mixed up with mules.

This whole example you're talking about proves absolutely nothing about domesticated animals not being able to sustain themselves. It'd be like me saying that Animal Farm is proof that animals can fend for themselves.

--------------------"I'm happy I'm the mentally disturbed person I am." -Nioca"Yes, Iffy is a demon." -Iffy"All (Spiderweb) servers should be taken down, erased, and then subjected to dissolution by alkahest." -AloraelPosts: 1186 |
Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00

Now that you mention it, no. I've vowed never to eat at places like Jack in the Crack or Carl's again. Not even so much because of what I think might be in it, but because I've made the mistake of looking at the meat patties. It just looks… sickly. Plus there's that weird feeling in my stomach after eating there (which might be because of the sick amount of Mayo, come to think of it).

Hot dogs are alright. I'll eat them once in a while, though I'm still not positive what kinds of corpses I'm eating, whether they're bovine or… primate. :eek:

--------------------Do not provoke the turtles.They do not like being provoked.-Lenar

ET reminds me of myself before I was taken into a small chatroom by TM, Alec, and various other members. They then proceeded to beat some sense into me...-Lt. Sullust

written Sunday, April 20 2008 18:36ProfileHomepage#36
I think this is the most evasive (and amusing) "discussion" of animal rights I've observed. Usually these sorts of things involve a lot of anger, resentment, and rolling eyes.

In fact: This thread isn't about animal rights at all! You're all avoiding the subject, aren't you?

Anyhow . . . I think I should thank Student of Trinity for not blaming me for generating this "discussion", but rather humanity's natural tendency to spontaneously turn a mondane topic into a sensitive one, even though I am, in fact, the instigator. Had he not put things in perspective, I would've thought that, by all rights, I should be punished . . . but now I know it's not my fault! It's in my genes! It's not my fault!

Anyhow, long story short: SoT is now on my Christmas List.

I also feel I should thank Goldenking for being a rational wise-ass during my absence.Posts: 178 |
Registered: Saturday, March 8 2008 08:00

I think this is the most evasive (and amusing) "discussion" of animal rights I've observed. Usually these sorts of things involve a lot of anger, resentment, and rolling eyes.

In fact: This thread isn't about animal rights at all! You're all avoiding the subject, aren't you?

No. This thread is clearly about spam, which has no rights.

Discussion of animal rights redirects to this thread. But only if you think it's necessary. I'm pretty sure we had a long enough discussion about it, personally. Especially since all our complaining about either side isn't going to change a thing.

[ Sunday, April 20, 2008 19:42: Message edited by: Nemesis. ]

--------------------Do not provoke the turtles.They do not like being provoked.-Lenar

ET reminds me of myself before I was taken into a small chatroom by TM, Alec, and various other members. They then proceeded to beat some sense into me...-Lt. Sullust

written Sunday, April 20 2008 20:29Profile#38
Clavicle: The problem with these discussions, on this board, is that the argument and counter-argument are almost assumed to have been spoken at the onset of the discussion. Hopefully a new discussion branch will be discovered, and we can begin with another assumption.

It is so bad that at one point some person discussed the advantages of having numbered responses to puns, jokes, positions, etc. presumably to decrease thread width. Or depth. Although, these really can't be considered all that deep. :)

... how many members here have had spam? And if so, what did you think of it?

SPAM was part of aid packages US sent to Russia in early 90s. Despite most of them being stolen en route and sold in stores, some were given out in schools, at least in Moscow, so my parents got a few cans. I don't think it tasted that badly, but I don't remember much about it.

--------------------Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword,For it too has the power to kill.However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword,Can also have the power to heal.Posts: 2649 |
Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00

written Monday, April 21 2008 08:03Profile#42
That's the funny thing about living in the USA. Even our garbage is of value to people living in (and as if they were in) a third world country. Poverty isn't pretty, and a can of SPAM can be the difference between malnutrition and ... slightly delayed malnutrition.

written Tuesday, April 22 2008 01:09ProfileHomepage#46
I thought Spam (an abreviation of SPiced hAM, by the way, as far as I think I understand) was part of the rationing for Allied troops on the western front (in other words: U.S. & England). But... I won't dispute that Hormel might have extended the rationing to Stalin's troops . . . as difficult, risky and costly as it must've been to push any western supply shipments across the German lines.Posts: 178 |
Registered: Saturday, March 8 2008 08:00

written Tuesday, April 22 2008 01:37Profile#47
The allies supplied the Soviet armies on a massive scale. The Red Army ran hundreds of thousands of American-built trucks, for example. None of this stuff went through the German lines, of course. It went by sea, mostly through Iran or the pacific coast, but quite a bit also across the north Atlantic.

None of which detracts from the fact that the Soviets mass produced their own excellent tanks, aircraft, and other weaponry and munitions, and did most of the actual fighting against Germany. The western allies gave significant aid, and eventually did open the second front, but the eastern front was the main theatre of war.

written Wednesday, April 23 2008 23:07Profile#48
ALL three sides payed by imaginary american money.Great....We could have stooped the war before it happened.Millions killed for money, profits and mass hysteria.

--------------------You can jump off a bridge, fire a gun in your mouth, drink poison,or going in to the tiger's pit but you will still end up dead it's a mater of time and how .Posts: 312 |
Registered: Sunday, November 26 2006 08:00